|
|
|
November 16, 2004 Sorry Everybody
I am recently beset by what seems to be the extreme absence of the proper reverence and respect for the man we call our president. Our capacity to respect the office of the president isn't based on the countenance of one human being. If my ability to show respect for authority was based on amicability, I would surely be in jail right now, hauled off by some police officer I gave a piece of my mind. For if perfection was the rod against which we measured our Commander and Chief, we would surely be without a qualified leader for the task. What we must respect is the power and burden of the presidential mantle on behalf of an entire nation. It is not to be taken lightly, spoken of flippantly, or disregarded, no matter who is in office. Freedom is a most beautiful thing. In fact, it is so beautiful that we as Americans often romanticize the idea of "freedom" to the point of extreme avoidance of (or un-consciousness from) the reality of what it really means to live in a free society. The "freedom" veil we live under is one that leads us to believe that America is a place where most anyone can presumptuously "do" whatever they choose and still get away with it. And unfortunately, these perceptions often ring true. Yet there is an unsettling haze of rebelliousness that has clouded the way we regard those authorities who have "charge" or "watch" over us. We have co-opted "freedom" as our right to be reckless. Today, that recklessness manifests itself in all matter of speech and hatred against a person who is inevitably our leader for the next four years. On election day, writer James Lileks illustrated a profound truth when he recounted a teachable moment he had with his 4-year-old daughter post-voting: "If John Kerry wins he won't be our president," Gnat said.And here we have a simplistic sketch of something America lacks. It's one of our fundamental weaknesses: we don't respect authority. The illustration is no Rembrandt, but the concept is so simple, even a child can grasp it. The idea of "respect" doesn't imply agreement or endorsement, but it does demand honor where honor is due. There is an interesting reality at work in this country that you won't find in many parts of the world. In America, it is perfectly acceptable and in fact, often encouraged to publicly berate and disrespect our nation's leaders. And while sites like "Sorry Everybody" may seem (forget "seem", they are) funny and perpetuate the whiny, pathetic, and downtrodden behavior of the average Liberal Bush-hater, these, among other public expressions of "displeasure" to the world are in fact more dangerous than we think. A house divided against itself cannot stand. Anyone who has engaged in battle (of any sorts) knows that those with dissension in the camp are ill-equipped to fight. When we as Americans, let the world know that we are divided even in our respect and support for our leadership, we are admitting a weakness and therefore opening ourselves up for attack. I apologize for our failure to recognize how completely embarrassing and silly we look when we heap manure on our own leaders who were elected according to our beloved democracy. I am sorry on behalf of those not mature enough to submit themselves to the electoral process. I am sorry that we set a poor example of what citizenship is all about by calling our governmental officials expletives and epithets and everything but the names they were given. Perhaps one day we will come to realize that submission isn't submission until we submit. On behalf of the whiny and the ill-informed part of America, I am truly sorry.   [ Click to Enlarge ] Comments Posted by: MarcV at November 16, 2004 05:02 AM True indeed! True indeed! Posted by: advocate at November 16, 2004 06:44 AM Ambra, that was beautiful. :) I think YOU should be President someday! :) That would rock!! Posted by: Janna at November 16, 2004 06:52 AM I'm wondering where the respect for the office among the right was when the last occupant was there. Convenient memories, it seems. Posted by: Oliver at November 16, 2004 07:28 AM Oliver, when the last occupant of the office was there, I did not hear prominent members of the right calling him unelected, burning him in effigy, etc. In fact, I quite clearly recall telling someone that made a "joke" about President Clinton dying that that was inappropriate and if repeated they would have to find another means of transportation. I will treat my Presidents, when in office, with the respect the office deserves even when the man in the office does not live up to it. (at the same time pursuing them through legal means to be removed from office when they do break the law. But that, as I see it, is different than the rhetoric) I can not guarantee that every "person on the right" acted like I do. I don't listen/watch/etc. All of them. (or even most) But I can tell you what MY opinion is and that it is quite consistent. Posted by: Sarah Schreffler at November 16, 2004 08:01 AM I beg to differ. Reagan is said to have never removed his suit coat in the Oval Office out of respect for the office he held. Clinton removed a lot more than his coat, something that can only be regarded as contempt for that same office. Virtually no one else, even many corporate CEOs, could have kept his job after a Clinton-like gropping incident. Clinton did and even played the victim. Treating both with the same measure of "respect" is absurd. Christians, alas, often don't make the distinction the Bible makes between rules for children and rules for adults. Children don't know how to make distinctions, so Mommy insists that they respect everyone, including the wicked woman next door who gossips nastily. When we grow up, that's one of the things we should put aside. We recognize people for what they are rather than simply the position they hold. As adults, it is now our job to do something about that nasty gossip. That's why Jesus disobeys so many of the rules that Paul lays down for believers in his epistles. Paul's rules were for weak, immature believers in tiny churches, rules that he makes clear he is disobeying. They didn't apply to Jesus, Paul, Peter or any mature believer. Nor, I might add, are the prophets sinning when they show such little respect for authority, blasting kings for their sins. God has standards for those in authority and expects mature believers to speak up when those standards are violated because sin in positions of authority hurts many people. We need to keep in mind that showing respect for an office often means being openly critical of those who're not up to the office they occupy. The problem with Bush's critics isn't that they're critics. It's that their criticism is so wrong. The problem with Clinton's critics was that they were inadept. Jesus would have done far better. We should never forget that Jesus was crucified for threatening the recognized authorities of his day, for not respecting the offices they held so dearly. From powerful Rome to the impoverished village Pharisee they hated what he was saying and might do. This isn't to say that we shouldn't use wisdom in how we criticize. Wisdom is exactly what we need before we abandon childish rules. As adults we are often called on to do things a lot more dangerous than running with scissors. That said, I loved you picture and note. You're very photogenic and clever. --Mike Perry, Inkling Books, Seattle Posted by: Mike Perry at November 16, 2004 09:43 AM Oliver, you would bring that point up, of course ;-) And it's a valid one as I believe both sides of the political spectrum ought to be held to the same standard. And I agree, there are Republicans just as guilty of dishonoring the office of the president. That does not however change principle. And whether yesterday or today, principle remains true. Even when Clinton was in office, I tempered my words until he had vacated. Even now, I don't wish or speak any malice upon him or his family. Pursuing legal means to remove a president on the grounds of purgery does not constitute disrespecting the presidency, but in fact, quite the contrary. Even when Clinton was lying through his teeth, his actions never warranted verbal mudslinging from his opposers. Those who did this were wrong. Posted by: Ambra Nyk at November 16, 2004 10:01 AM Alas and alack, much of our current contempt for authority can be traced to the permissive parents of the 60s, 70s, 80s, whatever, who encouraged their children to "stand up for themselves" no matter what. You know the type I refer to. The very idea of "children's rights" flies in the face of a proper civilized society, as it puts respect for authority on a back burner. Yes, there are and were many abuses by adult figures, but institutional authority must be established and respected for a society to function. If I had even THOUGHT about calling any of my parents' colleagues by their first names, I would have been banished to the dungeon. Now, there is no problem with kids calling daddy's friend "Joe" instead of "Mr. Smith". America today also lacks shame, and that is a bad thing. BTW -- Nice to have you back, young lady :) Posted by: Glen at November 16, 2004 10:45 AM Pauls rules for weak immature...tiny churches Jesus breaking the rules and disrespecting leaders Posted by: advocate at November 16, 2004 12:08 PM Clever, Ambra. I like it! By the way, you should put that pretty face on the front page. ;) Posted by: LB at November 16, 2004 02:22 PM Oh and Janna, if I were president, I'd subject the entire nation to fashion and etiquitte class. HA! Posted by: Ambra Nykol at November 16, 2004 02:44 PM Sounds good to me! ;) Posted by: Janna at November 16, 2004 03:40 PM Glen I think you bring up a valid point which I shall address sometime this week (which in Ambraspeak means next month). The last generation or so has become callous to the idea of authority. MarcV: I almost thought about starting a site with simlar pictures of what Americans should really be sorry for. I'd call it "America's Tearful Libation" or something whack like that. Anyway, I wish I had the time. Somebody better grab that idea and run. Mike: I am in fact NOT photogenic but I'll receive it nonetheless. La Shawn: It's not enough that I'm a piddly 23-year-old. The last thing I need is people landing on my site and seeing my mug up there and pre-judging what I have to say....so I dunno 'bout that front page photo action. Although it works quite well for a lovely lady such as yourself ;-) Posted by: Ambra Nykol at November 16, 2004 04:11 PM I didn't realize [until Ambra's post above] that LB was LaShawn Barber...Very inconspicuous secret identity, "LB". *bows* Posted by: Alex at November 16, 2004 04:34 PM Ambra, you rock! Posted by: Naarah at November 16, 2004 04:52 PM Ahh Ambra, make me your vice-president so I can make sure fellas don't have jacked-up feet when wearing sandals. :) As former "blanket disrespecter of authority", I understand your points too well. It seems like the "knee-jerk complain" is the norm. I have issues with our economy and outsourcing (Ya'll gon' speak Chinese!) but my freedom? Don't have an issue with that since I'm free to right on this blog. As a black man and a ex-con, I sometimes experienced two-pronged discrimination. But I can deal with it by just being me. And I'm free to call those discriminators any name I want. America is fragmented. And that fragmentation isn't a strength, as I have seen some bloggers say. It is a weakness and continues to grow. If common ground can't be found, then any party would be able to exploit it. Then your freedom would come under attack. Posted by: Solomon at November 16, 2004 06:38 PM you can put your picture on a site called we're not sorry Posted by: shari at November 16, 2004 10:55 PM Ambra, You are a straight-up trip! I am still lol from yesterday! Posted by: Duane at November 17, 2004 12:35 PM (expletive) (government) authority, (expeltive) bush, (expeltive) kerry(that was a waste of a good (expeltive) being that kerry and bush are the same person, that meaning a puppet for corporate amerika that controls the population through fear and the control of money) and uhh......... (expeltive) um.........just (expeltive) it all! Posted by: reaganyouth5 at November 18, 2004 12:20 PM I owe you all an apology for the harsh language. I’m sorry; sometimes I get a tad bit excited and start ranting curse words left and right. What I meant to say is Bush doesn’t deserve any respect because he doesn’t do anything but make a few speeches filled with empty promises, collect checks and take vacations. He is surrounded by people who make all his decisions he is just a “spokesperson for amerika”. Also I am grateful for living in a free society I love the fact that I can walk up to a cop and call him a “pig” or “ten pounds of monkey (expletive) stuffed in a five pound sack” so again I apologize. Posted by: reaganyouth5 at November 18, 2004 12:35 PM Mmkay, anarchists need not comment as their input won't be taken seriously. reaganyouth: Your languages was edited, but I'll make it simple, you cuss again, you're banned. You may not be able to control your tonguue, but you certainly can control your fingers. Solomon: I'm down for a run at the presidency with you. We'll call it Nykol/Mason 2008. I really respect your "blanket disrespector of authority" rebirth. Cause I know there are so many who came out of that mentality. You should teach a class ;-) Posted by: Ambra Nykol at November 18, 2004 05:06 PM |
|
 "...playful philosophizing" Dan Leroy, National Review Online
|
||||
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Hee hee! Loved the pictures. It has inspired me to try it out myself, though yours will be difficult to top.
It was very magnaminous of you to speak on behalf of the "whiny and the ill-informed part of America", a shadowy subset of this country. It reminds me of the WIN campaign from back in the 70's: Whip Inflation Now. Today we have to deal with WIIPA, and a large amount of tissue paper will be needed to clean up the mess they make.